From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAA44C7618B for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:57:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B93AB2075E for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:57:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1564063069; bh=3/gSn8ciWx/Rc0CKt8m5Ivb1PTazc8jVyqJ+l93TB24=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=iDpMddjMdURcgjOsqz8yuNzth3ys9nq/KUoVg+1yb/vz5FAExpKIgEaxRlSXbzb6F i/AAWRILYuwchRXZH0JyzwazHjW7YRW0GGNiD9fI/NUVtN8FwyIB974ooonFORqrwL nWZPPWroMMlMvz1oQfgUTcErVhjqEexBsIbmHh90= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726894AbfGYN5t (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:57:49 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39800 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727498AbfGYN5t (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 09:57:49 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A79ACAFCE; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 13:57:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:57:47 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Hildenbrand Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Andrew Morton , Oscar Salvador Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI / scan: Acquire device_hotplug_lock in acpi_scan_init() Message-ID: <20190725135747.GB3582@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190724143017.12841-1-david@redhat.com> <20190725125636.GA3582@dhcp22.suse.cz> <6dc566c2-faf6-565d-4ef1-2ac3a366bc76@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6dc566c2-faf6-565d-4ef1-2ac3a366bc76@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu 25-07-19 15:05:02, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 25.07.19 14:56, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 24-07-19 16:30:17, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> We end up calling __add_memory() without the device hotplug lock held. > >> (I used a local patch to assert in __add_memory() that the > >> device_hotplug_lock is held - I might upstream that as well soon) > >> > >> [ 26.771684] create_memory_block_devices+0xa4/0x140 > >> [ 26.772952] add_memory_resource+0xde/0x200 > >> [ 26.773987] __add_memory+0x6e/0xa0 > >> [ 26.775161] acpi_memory_device_add+0x149/0x2b0 > >> [ 26.776263] acpi_bus_attach+0xf1/0x1f0 > >> [ 26.777247] acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0 > >> [ 26.778268] acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0 > >> [ 26.779073] acpi_bus_attach+0x66/0x1f0 > >> [ 26.780143] acpi_bus_scan+0x3e/0x90 > >> [ 26.780844] acpi_scan_init+0x109/0x257 > >> [ 26.781638] acpi_init+0x2ab/0x30d > >> [ 26.782248] do_one_initcall+0x58/0x2cf > >> [ 26.783181] kernel_init_freeable+0x1bd/0x247 > >> [ 26.784345] kernel_init+0x5/0xf1 > >> [ 26.785314] ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50 > >> > >> So perform the locking just like in acpi_device_hotplug(). > > > > While playing with the device_hotplug_lock, can we actually document > > what it is protecting please? I have a bad feeling that we are adding > > this lock just because some other code path does rather than with a good > > idea why it is needed. This patch just confirms that. What exactly does > > the lock protect from here in an early boot stage. > > We have plenty of documentation already > > mm/memory_hotplug.c > > git grep -C5 device_hotplug mm/memory_hotplug.c > > Also see > > Documentation/core-api/memory-hotplug.rst OK, fair enough. I was more pointing to a documentation right there where the lock is declared because that is the place where people usually check for documentation. The core-api documentation looks quite nice. And based on that doc it seems that this patch is actually not needed because neither the online/offline or cpu hotplug should be possible that early unless I am missing something. > Regarding the early stage: primarily lockdep as I mentioned. Could you add a lockdep splat that would be fixed by this patch to the changelog for reference? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs